1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Summary of disposition;

A. On May 14, 2019, the Defendant issued a disposition revoking a driver’s license (hereinafter “instant disposition”) to the Plaintiff on the ground that “The Plaintiff was driving a B car, while under the influence of alcohol of 0.140% of blood alcohol concentration, on April 24, 2019, on the street in front of the D cafeteria located in Kimhae-si, to the front of the same E-care center (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

B. On July 1, 2019, the Plaintiff filed an administrative appeal with the Central Administrative Appeals Commission. However, a ruling dismissing the Plaintiff’s claim was rendered on August 29, 2019.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 1, 4 through 7, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion constitutes a deviation or abuse of discretionary authority when considering the fact that the Plaintiff did not have a long-term driving or traffic accident history, that is a simple driving who does not cause an accident, that is, a professional driver’s license is essential, and that his family’s livelihood, etc.

B. (1) Determination is that the public interest needs to prevent traffic accidents caused by drinking driving, because of frequent traffic accidents caused by drinking driving today's frequent and severe results, and the revocation of driver's license on the ground of drinking driving is more severe than the case of general beneficial administrative acts, unlike the case of general beneficial administrative acts, the general preventive aspect that should prevent drinking driving rather than the disadvantage of the party due to the revocation should be emphasized. The Plaintiff's driving level constitutes the criteria for revocation of driver's license under Article 91 (1) [Attachment Table 28] of the Enforcement Rule of the Road Traffic Act, with the degree of the Plaintiff's driving level 0.140% of blood alcohol concentration.

(2) In addition, in full view of the fact that the inevitable circumstances in which the Plaintiff had no choice but to drive under the influence of alcohol do not peep, blood alcohol concentration, and revocation of a driver’s license is able to obtain a license again after a certain period of time, the effect of sanctions is limited to a limited period.